[NOTE:
Who said the following? “This state of mind, which subordinates
the interests of the ego to the conservation of the community, is really
the first premise for every truly human culture…. The basic attitude
from which such activity arises, we call – to distinguish it from
egoism and selfishness-idealism. By this we understand only the individual’s
capacity to make sacrifices for the community, for his fellow men.”
Doesn’t this sound like the Communitarian philosophy of today?
Actually, it was Hitler who wrote the quoted words in Mein Kampf
(July 18, 1925). Further relevant to what is occurring today, Leonard
Peikoff in Ominous Parallels (1982) wrote: “Contrary
to the Marxists, the Nazis did not advocate public ownership of the
means of production. They did demand that the government oversee and
run the nation’s economy.

The
issue of legal ownership, they explained, is secondary; what counts
is the issue of control. Private citizens, therefore, may continue to
hold titles to property – so long as the state reserves to itself
the unqualified right to regulate the use of their property….
But the Nazis defended their policies, and the country did not rebel;
it accepted the Nazi argument. Selfish individuals may be unhappy, the
Nazis said, but what we have established in Germany is the ideal system,
socialism. In its Nazi usage this term is not restricted to a theory
of economics; it is to be understood in a fundamental sense. ‘Socialism’
for the Nazis denotes the principle of collectivism as such and its
corollary, statism – in every field of human action, including
but not limited to economics. ‘To be a socialist,’ says
Goebbels, ‘is to submit the I to the thou; socialism is sacrificing
the individual to the whole.’”]

The
British “Power Elite” (PE) members didn’t like any
strong national leaders. These included Egypt’s Gamal Abdal Nasser
(who nationalized the Suez Canal on July 26, 1956) and Iran’s
Mohammad Mossadegh, who nationalized that country’s oil industry
at the expense of the British. In Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist
Ben Bagdikian’s The Media Monopoly, one reads about “when
Kermit Roosevelt, a former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officer,
wrote a book called Countercoup: The Struggle for the Control of
Iran. It was the author’s inside version of how intelligence
agencies overthrew a left-leaning Iranian premier, Mohammad Mossadegh,
in 1953 and reinstated the Shah. The issue was control of oil. The plot
was called ‘Ajax,’ of which Roosevelt wrote: ‘The
original proposal for Ajax came from the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC)
after its expulsion from Iran nine months earlier.’ The book was
published by McGraw-Hill in early 1979. Books were on sale in bookstores
and reviewer copies were already in the mail when British Petroleum,
successor corporation to AIOC, persuaded McGraw-Hill to recall all the
books – from the stores and from reviewers.”

Today,
the PE uses the terrorist acts of radical Muslims against Israel as
a means of pressuring Israelis to make compromises that will lead to
an eventual acceptance of a World Socialist Government. I’ve quoted
in the past Lincoln Bloomfield’s Study Memorandum No. 7 for Rhodes
scholar Secretary of State Dean Rusk in 1962: “If the communist
dynamic was greatly abated, the West might lose whatever incentive it
has for world government.” So just substitute the words “radical
Muslim” for “communist” and “Israel” for
“the West,” and you will understand the PE’s mechanism
at work today.

But
it’s not as though no Israeli could anticipate the future, because
Look magazine (January 16, 1962) published Israeli Prime Minister
David Ben-Gurion’s prediction of what the world would look like
in 25 years: “The Cold War will be a thing of the past…
a gradual democratization of the Soviet Union…. On the other hand,
the United States [will be transformed] into a welfare state with a
planned economy. Western and Eastern Europe will become a federation
of autonomous states having a Socialist and democratic regime. With
the exception of the USSR as a federated Eurasian state, all other continents
will become united in a world alliance, at whose disposal will be an
international police force…. A pill to prevent pregnancy will
slow down the explosive natural increase in China and India….”

Concerning
U.S. support for radical Muslims like Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran and
the Taliban in Afghanistan, on July 3, 1979 President Carter signed
a directive approving covert aid to anti-Soviet fighters in Kabul. And
Carter’s National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski (ZB) told
The Guardian reporters David Leigh and Richard Norton-Taylor
(“House of Saud Looks Close to Collapse,” November 21, 2001),
“that the Russians had been drawn into what he saw as his cleverly
baited trap. The day the Soviet forces crossed the border [into Afghanistan]
he wrote to Carter, saying: ‘We now have the opportunity to give
the USSR their Vietnam War.’” Often unreported about this
chapter in U.S. history is the role of China, but Mike Evans in his
new book, Jimmy Carter: The Liberal Left and World Chaos, points
out that in January 1980, Secretary of Defense Harold Brown “was
able to secure permission for U.S. supply planes to traverse Chinese
air space on flights to arm the Afghan Mujahadeen. Soon thereafter,
and despite China’s history of ignoring human rights issues, Congress
conferred upon the Chinese government the status of most-favored-nation.
The U.S. agreed to sell specific technological materials that had both
military and civilian uses.”

When
asked later about the wisdom of supporting radical Muslims, ZB reportedly
said: “What is more important in world history? The Taliban or
the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Moslems or the liberation
of Central Europe and the end of the Cold War?” (See Blowback:
The Cost and Consequences of American Empire by Chalmers Johnson.)

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

“Some
agitated Moslems”?! According to Clare Lopez of The Centre for
Counter Intelligence and Security Studies, Iran’s Ministry of
Intelligence and Security (MOIS, also known as VEVAK, Vezarat-e Ettela’at
va Amniat-e Keshvar) was involved in the 1996 attack on Khobar Towers
in Saudi Arabia (19 Americans killed), the 1998 East African Embassy
bombings, and the October 2000 attack (by Al Qaeda) on the USS Cole.
VEVAK was also involved in the 1983 bombings of the U.S. Embassy in
Beirut, about which the U.S. had foreknowledge! According to CIA agent
Robert Baer in See No Evil (2002), he saw “an intelligence report
from March 1982 – a full 13 months before the Embassy bombing
– stating that Iran was in touch with a network capable of destroying
the U.S. Embassy in Beirut. A subsequent report even specified a date
the operation should be carried out. The source was firsthand and its
validity rock solid.” Ask yourself why the U.S. would allow its
Embassy to be bombed when it had foreknowledge of the attack.

Dennis Laurence Cuddy, historian and political
analyst, received a Ph.D. from the University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill (major in American History, minor in political science). Dr. Cuddy
has taught at the university level, has been a political and economic
risk analyst for an international consulting firm, and has been a Senior
Associate with the U.S. Department of Education.

Cuddy has also testified before members of Congress
on behalf of the U.S. Department of Justice. Dr. Cuddy has authored or
edited twenty books and booklets, and has written hundreds of articles
appearing in newspapers around the nation, including The Washington Post,
Los Angeles Times and USA Today. He has been a guest on numerous radio
talk shows in various parts of the country, such as ABC Radio in New York
City, and he has also been a guest on the national television programs
USA Today and CBS's Nightwatch.

The British “Power
Elite” (PE) members didn’t like any strong national leaders.
These included Egypt’s Gamal Abdal Nasser (who nationalized the
Suez Canal on July 26, 1956) and Iran’s Mohammad Mossadegh, who
nationalized that country’s oil industry at the expense of the British.